Breath of the Wild "Rethink the Conventions of Zelda"

[The Wanderer]

Basically my entire views on non-linearity and how it could work are on my site here, so I don't want to spend long on it. I have a whole article on it which discusses why Zelda should occasionally return to non-linearity and how things like story and difficulty could be handled. You may discover something you hadn't thought about.

Generally, I am all over Nintendo's apparent decision to once again consider non-linearity in Zelda. To agree with DarkestLink a bit, I don't believe complete non-linearity should be a permanent thing for Zelda - that kind of gameplay always requires a unique approach to story, dungeons, difficulty, among other stuff, so things could eventually get awkward if that's kept up. I do, however, think it should be a frequent thing, and Zelda should always have a big, wide world packed with secrets regardless.

But at the same time, non-linearity is what Zelda was founded on, perhaps not in the most stable of conditions but it was one of Zelda's core elements. Zelda is all about exploration and the freedom to get lost in your own fantasy land, which is harder to do in installments like Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword which limit so much of the world to you from the beginning. Because doing non-linearity right would be a bit more difficult than normal doesn't mean Nintendo can't try to take the franchise back to what it was meant to be. At least they'll have tried, gosh dang it.

On the issue of multiplayer...I'm looking forward to whatever Nintendo's cooking up, but it's probably not going to be the selling point of the game for me. I actually think Zelda should eventually get heavily involved in the online world, probably not for Zelda Wii U since it's a little too soon to implement the concept along with everything else, but at some point they should play with it. Imagine completing dangerous dungeons and caverns online with other people, sharing the loot, taking down bosses, and exploring lethal mazes. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

 

[Dio]

Well I'm interested to see what they are going to do with this. Non linear dungeons sound like a good idea, having a choice of which to do first. I'm not sure about the co op idea. I personally don't see how more than one player can be link, if there was multiplayer apart from Player 1 who would be completing the quest the other players would probably have a very different role.

 

[Cfrock]

Unless Aonuma has something completely different up his sleeve, focusing on things we take for granted like 'playing by yourself' may not be simply a multiplayer notion. Probably is, but maybe he meant A.I field help etc. Although that may be best described as 'playing along side' who knows, gonna be an epic e3 though.

It's an interesting way of thinking about it. Rethinking the notion of playing by yourself could very well end up being a more involved companion or an A.I. Partner of some form. It could mean some kind of online interactions, making friends or the Miiverse a part of the game in some way. It'll be very interesting to see what happens and how this idea evolves.

 

[ZeldafreakCJM]

Am I the only one who dosen't want a non-linear dungeon order? I wouldn't mind it if the dungeons were interesting and fun, but I'm afraid that with non-linearity each dungeon would have to be designed in the absence of any of the games items except for that dungeons item. I'm also afraid that non-linearity could damage the structure of the plot. In Zelda I prefer a linear, interesting plot where everything is canon, I'm afraid that important plot pieces tied to specific dungeons might become non-linear in where they go in the plot. Having moveable plot pieces sounds horrible to me, that's not even to mention the possible cookie-cutter dungeon design that might come.

 

[Ventus]

Am I the only one who dosen't want a non-linear dungeon order? I wouldn't mind it if the dungeons were interesting and fun, but I'm afraid that with non-linearity each dungeon would have to be designed in the absence of any of the games items except for that dungeons item. that's not even to mention the possible cookie-cutter dungeon design that might come.

Erm...no, having non-linear dungeon order does not equate to items not being used in dungeons. That's an incredibly quick conclusion that too many people make. Many dungeons can require the sword, slingshot, bow, boomerang, and bombs...but at the same time, the "requirements" can actually be optional -- different paths can be taken in the dungeons to avoid being forced into those item-requiring rooms. Of course, if one actually HAS certain items, it'd be fair to reward the player with more of the dungeon, harder/more challenging content, and extra things to obtain.

I'm not sure where you're getting at with "cookie-cutter" design; ALttP didn't have it. :I

I'm also afraid that non-linearity could damage the structure of the plot. In Zelda I prefer a linear, interesting plot where everything is canon, I'm afraid that important plot pieces tied to specific dungeons might become non-linear in where they go in the plot. Having moveable plot pieces sounds horrible to me,

Like JJ said, ALttP was a (mostly) non-linear game which had none of the problems you mentioned. I'm *pretty* sure that the plot did not suffer due to the game having many orders in which you could complete dungeons. Oh but wait, you said a "linear, interesting plot where everything is canon."

Check this out: the "main plot" for every Zelda game is typically nothing more than "go to X places to collect Y number of magical items to save Z person." In other words, there is no real "main" plot to the Zelda games except what you're doing in the present moment. I'd argue that, in a first playthrough, a player is shaping Link's story as they go, not playing some pre-defined course merely going through the motions. A very easy way to make the plot interesting is to have smaller plots within each area. I'll use Ocarina of Time as an example (I'm aware this game is 14+ years old, but even so I don't expect people to know this; this is just an example):

As Adult Link, you go to the Goron City to get the Fire Medallion, awaken the Sage of Fire whoever that may be, and add to your strength in order to eventually take Ganondorf down. That's the main plot. However, what happens inside of Goron City is a little extra -- you get to see [Link] the Goron cowering in fear of Ganondorf's henchmen, then you learn that Darunia went to fight some ancient, evil dragon. That's sideplot, which is interesting although it doesn't require the Forest Temple to be beat for you to understand their plight. Once you actually trek into the FT, Darunia will tell you that several Gorons are being held captive; Ganondorf entrapped them and would be sacrificing them to Volvagia in order to show the other races of Hyrule not to mess with the G-man. See? More sideplot, which is interesting but nonlinear in nature; this doesn't require the Water Temple, the Shadow Temple, or any other dungeon (besides maybe Dodongo's Cavern) to be completed for you to be remotely engrossed in your scouring this Fire Temple and obtaining your Medallion.

By having captivating side/subplot (whatever the correct term is), you can still have an arching main plot overhead but you won't be tied down to the generic, linear formula the series has been following since MM. Besides, a linear plot isn't necessarily better than a nonlinear plot, and the same is true vice versa. :I

 

[DarkestLink]

A Link to the Past was a non-linear game and had none of the problems you mentioned.

aLttP had less story than SM64 and about as much plot as the Twilight series. The puzzles were still weak in this age of Zelda. I...rarely used the items for puzzles at all when I think about it...

 

[The Wanderer]

I'd quote Ventus, but that would take too long, so know that I'm talking to Ventus in this post.

I think you basically hit the nail on the head. Dungeons need not rely on items to make them interesting, and in fact, perhaps they shouldn't. Dungeons can have heart-pounding action, intelligent atmosphere, and devious puzzles without relying on all the equipment Link picks up. They really shouldn't make a difference. I think they've become part of the "conventions" of Zelda, but when you think about it, you don't need all the items to make a dungeon interesting. Don't believe me? (This is to everyone else.) Then look back over any Zelda game worth a darn. How often did dungeons require use of previously-gained items? Of those requirements, which moments really added to the intrigue and enjoyability of the dungeon? In the entire series, you probably won't find many, because the dungeons were generally interesting on their own and the additional item uses were thrown in for kicks and giggles.

(Back to Ventus.) It's also a good point that items gained outside the current dungeon can be used for "extracurricular" stuff, like hidden areas. This would add a huge amount of replay value to the game. Add to that how items may be used to help you in subtle ways, like finding shortcuts back to the start, fending off dark-based enemies, or camouflaging you in stealth sections, and you still have items which are constantly and intelligently used without being crucial.

Non-linear dungeon order will require unique approaches to story, but that doesn't make them bad approaches. As you said, Ventus, Ocarina of Time had a pretty interesting plot, but most of the action was focused on the here-and-now rather than everything up ahead. Actually, this has been the norm for most Zelda games. It should be an easy matter to translate that into a different approach.

I don't think people should fear what will happen to dungeons, items, or the story because of non-linear design, because really, it's not hard to iron out any new flaws that present themselves. It'll be a bit different, but that's a good thing. I predict some Zelda games will be linear after Zelda Wii U, so non-linearity likely isn't here to stay.

 

[DarkestLink]

Dungeons can have heart-pounding action, intelligent atmosphere, and devious puzzles without relying on all the equipment Link picks up.

Sure, they can, but this is very limiting to the developers.

Then look back over any Zelda game worth a darn. How often did dungeons require use of previously-gained items?

Well to me anything worth a darn are the games in the top 10. And...yeah...with the exception of the first dungeon, they almost always needed items from other dungeons. OoT was made before they really started going into this and even that had it.

Dodongo's Cavern, Jabu Jabu's belly, Forest Temple, Fire Temple, Water Temple, Shadow Temple, Spirit Temple...all of these required items outside the dungeon. And that's what made OoT so great.

Of those requirements, which moments really added to the intrigue and enjoyability of the dungeon?

Again, this is what made OoT's puzzles shine for its time. And it continued with MM, tWW, TP, SS, PH, ST, and even the oracle games.

Non-linear dungeon order will require unique approaches to story, but that doesn't make them bad approaches.

Require? No. If Nintendo is left with the choice of making a story try to work with non-linearity or just scrap the bulk of it, they'll choose the later. This is why LoZ-LA have little story at all.

 

[The Wanderer]

Dodongo's Cavern, Jabu Jabu's belly, Forest Temple, Fire Temple, Water Temple, Shadow Temple, Spirit Temple...all of these required items outside the dungeon. And that's what made OoT so great.

...

Require? No. If Nintendo is left with the choice of making a story try to work with non-linearity or just scrap the bulk of it, they'll choose the later. This is why LoZ-LA have little story at all.

I don't know that OoT's dungeons really did use other items that much. In the Fire Temple, you could use the Fairy Bow to get the Map, which was optional. I suppose I could be wrong, but I recall that being the only time you could clearly use an item from another dungeon in the Fire Temple. In Jabu-Jabu's Belly, you could shoot switches with your Slingshot...or you could hit them with Ruto. You still didn't need to use your previous items for the rest. I'm pretty certain this theme continues for all of the dungeons except Ganon's Castle, which doesn't really count. Even as early as OoT, most dungeons made heavy use of their inherent items but little else. I'm racking my brain, and I honestly can't think of more than a few moments in the entire game, Ganon's Castle aside, that require using items found outside the current dungeon.

Additionally, I'm referring to puzzles that mean something, not just any puzzle at all. It doesn't take a huge amount of thinking to shoot a switch with a projectile; that puzzle could have easily been modified into something that didn't require the bow or boomerang or whatever. I'm referring to clever puzzles that require skilled use of the item gained outside the current dungeon. As I said, I can't recall many of these, if any. You can smash in the rusted switch with your Megaton Hammer, but does that "puzzle" really mean anything?

You also don't seem to be placing a great deal of faith in Nintendo regarding story. When video games were just blossoming and the technology to run it was taking its baby steps, shallow stories are understandable. I highly doubt Nintendo will treat a non-linear Zelda game in this era with an air of, "Well, story doesn't matter, so say anything and don't build on it." Even if we don't like the story or it's just as confusing as Zelda always is, I know they'll at least try. I suppose I can't prove this with physical evidence, but if Nintendo's been trying to tell better stories with Zelda over the years, why would they simply stop here?

 

[Zelink]

I would welcome non-linear gameplay with open arms. It seems to me as though non-linear gameplay wouldn't limit developers with design but actually challenge them to make each dungeon unique without the aid of other weapons. Traversing terrain could be more sub plot based like The Wanderer was talking about, thus adding story in a unique and meaningful way. Seems to me like this is a step forward in Zelda gameplay. As far as online...I personally don't care for it at all. Zelda's a lone quest for me and it always has been.

 

[DarkestLink]

I don't know that OoT's dungeons really did use other items that much. In the Fire Temple, you could use the Fairy Bow to get the Map, which was optional. I suppose I could be wrong, but I recall that being the only time you could clearly use an item from another dungeon in the Fire Temple.

I'm pretty sure I used the hookshot too, though I may be wrong, and I recall using bombs...lots and lots of bombs. Actually...is there anything left to use? I mean we just lost a lot of the items from the time jump.

In Jabu-Jabu's Belly, you could shoot switches with your Slingshot...or you could hit them with Ruto.

I'll have to try that...but I'm curious how you pressed the switches when you didn't have ruto and if you somehow used her to kill the flying enemies (that were required to kill).

I'm pretty certain this theme continues for all of the dungeons except Ganon's Castle, which doesn't really count. Even as early as OoT, most dungeons made heavy use of their inherent items but little else. I'm racking my brain, and I honestly can't think of more than a few moments in the entire game, Ganon's Castle aside, that require using items found outside the current dungeon.

Off the top of my head:

Dodongo's Cavern: Slingshot

Jabu Jabu's Belly: Slingshot

Forest Temple: Hookshot

Fire Temple Hookshot(?), Bow, Bombs

Water Temple Hookshot, Bow, Bombs, Iron Boots

Shadow Temple: Eye of Truth, Longshot, Dins Fire, Bow, Bombs, Iron Boots

Spirit Temple: Eye of Truth, Longshot, Bow, Slingshot, Bombs, Megaton Hammer, Hover Boots, Boomerang

Additionally, I'm referring to puzzles that mean something, not just any puzzle at all. It doesn't take a huge amount of thinking to shoot a switch with a projectile; that puzzle could have easily been modified into something that didn't require the bow or boomerang or whatever. I'm referring to clever puzzles that require skilled use of the item gained outside the current dungeon.

Let's keep in mind, this is Zelda. Also between LoZ and OoT...what had better puzzles? OoT.

You also don't seem to be placing a great deal of faith in Nintendo regarding story.

Because Nintendo doesn't care about story. They've said this over and over. If Miyamoto had his way, he'd do away with it...in fact, I have a hunch that they're trying to use non-linearity as an excuse for that.

I highly doubt Nintendo will treat a non-linear Zelda game in this era with an air of, "Well, story doesn't matter, so say anything and don't build on it."

Why wouldn't they?

Even if we don't like the story or it's just as confusing as Zelda always is, I know they'll at least try. I suppose I can't prove this with physical evidence, but if Nintendo's been trying to tell better stories with Zelda over the years, why would they simply stop here?

Because now Miyamoto finally has his excuse to chuck the story out the window.

 

[Kirino]

What makes you think Miyamoto doesn't care about story and wants to get rid of it completely?

 

[Xinnamin]

Miyamoto has made it clear that he considers the plot to be secondary to the gameplay. He wants to make a good game before he tells a good story. That doesn't mean story can be done away with completely. Nintendo has at least shown effort in their storytelling, with SS being an origin story and HH's timeline and whatnot. At this point it would honestly be a terrible idea for them to just throw story off to the side because the series has been trending in a more plot-heavy direction.

That being said, non-linearity of dungeons and decent storyline are not mutually exclusive. All they would have to do is what they did with the OoT dungeons, but slightly more. The dungeon progression pattern usually has sequences where a few dungeons in a row have an objective of collecting pieces of a set (3 spiritual stones, 5 sages in OoT; 2 pearls, 2 sages in WW; 3 twili pieces of something, 3 mirror shards in TP; etc etc). They could make dungeons in those "sets" be completable in any order, maybe adding optional content that can only be unlocked by items from other dungeons in the "sets". Non-linear dungeon progression, story still allowed to move forward.

 

[Ventus]

'll have to try that...but I'm curious how you pressed the switches when you didn't have ruto and if you somehow used her to kill the flying enemies (that were required to kill).

Boxes hold down blue switches as well.

Shadow Temple: Eye of Truth, Longshot, Dins Fire, Bow, Bombs, Iron Boots

Eye of Truth isn't actually required; it's just recommended. Dins is an external item not found in a dungeon. Are Iron Boots required for Shadow Temple? I honestly don't recall.

Let's keep in mind, this is Zelda. Also between LoZ and OoT...what had better puzzles? OoT.

Depends on how you gauge "better puzzle". Some people get stuck with the simplest of block-pushing puzzles. Pushing a block isn't at all complex, but complexity =/= good on its own. What merit does complexity hold if I figured it out on first try? What merit does simplicity have if I got stuck on it for two days straight? Different people like different things.

Because Nintendo doesn't care about story. They've said this over and over. If Miyamoto had his way, he'd do away with it...in fact, I have a hunch that they're trying to use non-linearity as an excuse for that.

Nintendo obviously doesn't care about story -- the Zelda timeline is messed up as it is -- but they wouldn't release a game with a completely nonsensical, standalone story. Linearity or not does not judge how good a story is; you may not prefer X to Y but that doesn't necessarily mean X is better than Y.

Why wouldn't they?

They haven't done a single Zelda game since OoT like that, and I doubt it has to do with whether or not the games had (non)linear dungeon structure.

Because now Miyamoto finally has his excuse to chuck the story out the window.

Ehm...Miyamoto has had this "excuse" since day one. There was never any incentive for him to create, aid or oversee modern/linear Zelda. It's not like fans were pressuring him or anything!

 

[Locke]

Because Nintendo doesn't care about story. They've said this over and over. If Miyamoto had his way, he'd do away with it...in fact, I have a hunch that they're trying to use non-linearity as an excuse for that.

That's not true. He's said that gameplay is more important than story, but afaik he's never said that any game would be better without story altogether. He just wants the story to be based on the gameplay rather than the other way around.

OT: I'm just a tad worried about how he worded "Complete dungeons in a certain order." The set dungeon order in recent games is not the root of the problem of linearity. It manifests itself in the overworld and story as well. Simply providing more freedom in dungeon order isn't enough to renew a focus on exploration, which is what they need to do. I'd be more hopeful if the convention they were rethinking was "More progression than exploration." They need to stop pushing you to complete specific game tasks and just let you take in the world and complete tasks as you discover them or as you're inclined to.

As for "Play by yourself," I'm hoping this is alluding to cooperative adventuring like the Tingle Tuner rather than multiplayer side content like PH and ST. I'm sure many find the side content enjoyable and I can't fault them for adding it, but what the game really needs in order to have meaningful multiplayer experiences is cooperative main storyline adventure. Zelda has historically been those games where one person plays and maybe others watch. Get those other people, or at least one other person, more involved. With both WM+ and the GamePad at their disposal, I'm confident they'll put them to good use for this purpose.